wss 




^mmM::fi^mmrm 



/^ r^-r^ 




DEMOCRATIC INCOMPETENCY. 



The Treasury vrrecked, the Republican policy of protection 
alone can restore money to the Treasury and confidence to th« 
country. 



SPEECH 



OF 



Hon. CHARLES H. GUOSVENOR, 



OIF OHIO 



HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 



"Wednesday, April 1, 1896. 



-W-ASHING-TON". 
1896. 



^1i>^ 

•^^7 



SPEECH 

OP 

HON. CHARLES H. GEOSVENOR. 



The House, as in Committee of the Whole, having under consideration the 
bill (H. R. 7(104^ making appropriations tor sundry civil expenses of the Gov- 
ernment for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1897, and for other purposes — 

Mr. GROSVENOR said: 

Mr. Chairman: I move to amend by striking out the last word. 
It is greatly to be regi'etted that it becomes the duty of the 
chairman of the Appropriations Committee of this House to state 
constantly to the representatives of the people that there is exist- 
ing in this country a condition which requires something more 
and worse than economy in the public expenditures. Economy 
is one thing — just economy — economical administration of the 
country. Parsimony is another thing. But worse than either 
of those is the existence of a public necessity for the expendi- 
ture of public money, with an impossibility on the part of the 
House of Representatives to furnish that money. That is not 
economy; that is not parsimony: that is an admission of a condi- 
tion whicli at the present time is unsurmountable and which we 
are all compelled to recognize and which we are all bound by. 

I stood here in the Fifty-first Congress, when we were making 
appropriations liberally and generously — not extravagantly. No 
Appropriations Committee of the House of Representatives ever 
did its duty more faithfully than did the Appropriations Commit- 
tee of that Congress. In the two sessions of the Fifty-first Con- 
gress we appropriated something like a billiou dollars; and our 
enemies called us, in language intended to be a reproach, "the 
billion-dollar Congress." That was their watchword and battle 
cry in the unfortunate campaign in 1892. In passing I desire sim- 
ply to say that in no single instance were they able to point out 
where there was a dollar of money appropriated that was not 
needed for the public service, which was not wisely appropriated. 
Yet the cry was that we had been extravagant because of the 
enormous aggregate of appropriations. 

Now we find ourselves limited. The question vdth us now is 
not, What is the public demand? The public buildings of the coun- 
try, partly constructed, are wasting and suffering bj- the lapse of 
time, and we are unable to make the appropriations for their pres- 
ervation or maintenance. The public works on the rivers and 
harbors of the country are wasting by erosion to the extent of 
more than a million dollars annually, and we are unable to appro- 
priate the necessary money either to push forward the work or to 
providently protect the work already done. The demands of com- 
2295 3 



merce for greater depth of water in our harbors and rivers have 
to be met by the declaration of our inability to do anything in that 
direction. 

Now, I want to point out (and I have not quite as much time as 
I should like) a comparison between two enactments — one a Re- 
publican enactment and one a Democratic enactment — through 
which and by which practically the whole of the revenue of this 
Government is derived. And I want to show you in figures, fig- 
ures that nobody will criticise or dispute, jiist where the fault lies, 
so that the Committee on Appropriations of this House is to-day 
compelled, in the execution of a plain duty, to stand here protest- 
ing against appropriations that are absolutely needed and ought to 
be made, in which the representatives of the people are interested, 
and appropriations which they are in duty bound to insist upon. 

During the Fifty-first Congress we had enacted a revenue law, 
supplementary to a Republican revenue law, based upon the gen- 
eral principle not of revenue but of protection, and yet we had 
money enough under that law, and I propose to put in contrast 
now — and I can do it without any great exhaustion of the time of 
the committee — a few tables compiled for me from the official 
records of the Treasury Department by Mr. O. P. Austin, an effi- 
cient man who has given the subject careful attention and con- 
sideration, and who is especially efficient in these matters. 

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. 

Mr. STEELE. If I can be recognized, I will yield to the gen- 
tleman. 

Mr. GROSVENOR. If it is competent, I would like five min- 
utes more. 

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman will pro- 
ceed. 

Mr. GROSVENOR. Mr. Chairman, these tables, one by one, are 
as follows: The first I offer is a table of the receipts and expendi- 
tures for the first nineteen months of the operation of the Wilson 
law. I want the country and I want my friends on the other side 
of the House to realize what it is that they are responsible for, 
and to ask them to atone for what they have done in the past by 
a recantation in the present. I give by months the receipts and 
expenditures of the first nineteen months of the general operation 
of that law. It will be seen from this table that the total receipts 
amount during that period to $481,433,509. During the same 
period the expenditures of the United States for the necessities of 
the Government araoimted to a total of $557,581,385, showing a 
deficiency between the receipts and expenditures during that 
period of $76,157,876. 

This table, which I append, is in detail as follows: 

Receipts and expenditures, first nineteen months of Wilson law. 





Receipts. 


Expenditures. 


September 


1894. 


$33,621,238 
19,i:ffl,340 
19,411,403 
31,366,136 


$30,323,018 
32,713,039 


October 


November .. .. 


28, 477, 188 


December 


27,135,460 



Receipts arid expenditures, firxt nineteen nmnths of Wilaon /ai« —Coutiuued. 



Receipts. 



Expenditures. 



1895. 

January 

Foln'uary 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October -- 

November 

December 

1896. 

January 

February 

March -- 

Total 



•Zi.:i\i. 

29,(»tiil, 

27,9()1 
25, 9K6 
36,288 



29, 207. 670 
26,0.59.228 
26,041,148 



$34, .52.$, 447 

2.5,(l!»t),035 
25,71(1,957 
32,990,r,76 
28,5.">«,213 
21,t;8;!,029 
38,.51»,(K)3 
32, .588, 184 
24, 320, 4«1 
34, 503, 425 
27,199,2*3 
25,814,317 



32, 694, 830 
26.749,956 
27,:i44,000 



481. 423, .509 



5.57,581,385 



Deficiency, $76,1.57,s7t;. 

I give also in this connection the customs receipts for the same 
period, by months, under the McKinlej^ law as compared with 
the Wilson tariff law. For the first nineteen months of the McKin- 
ley law the total receipts were $;J02,884.886. while for the same 
period under the Wilson law the total was $257,069,373. 
The table by mouths is as follows: 

Customs receipts under MeKinley and Wilson tariff laws. 



Month. 



1890. 



October . . . 
November 
December . 



1891. 



January 

February -. 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September . 
October — 
November . 
December . 



1892. 



January . . 
February 

March 

April 



Total 



2295 



Customs 
receipts 
first 19 
months of 
MeKinley 
law. 



$24. 934, 114 
15. 227, 641 
16,104,533 




Month. 



September - 

October 

November. 
December . 



1895. 



January — 
February . . 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July- 

August 

September. 

October 

November. 
December . 



1896. 



302, 884, 886 



January .. 
February. 
March 



Total 3.57,069.273 



Customs 

receipts 

first 19 

months of 

Wilson 

law. 



$15. .564, 990 
11,963,118 
l(),2(iO,693 
ll,2(j:5,049 



17,361,916 

13, :m, 6.91 
14, 929, 789 
12.453,086 
12, 474, .558 
12, 130, 443 
14,076,934 
15, 639, 047 
14, 6.53, 967 
13,773,045 
11,4.55.314 
13,169,172 



16,380,796 
13,906,393 
13, :M4, 215 



6 



I have also a table of the internal-revenue receipts under the 
McKinley and Wilson laws, to which I ask your attention. For 
the first nineteen months under the McKinley law the total re- 
ceipts were $231,222,122, while under the Wilson law the total 
was $201,069,812. The table by months is as follows: 

Internal-revenue receipts under McKinley and Wilson laws. 



Month. 



1890. 

October , 

November 

December , 

1891. 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December 

1892. 

January 

February 

March 

April 

Total .... 



Internal- 
revenue re- 
ceipts first 

nineteen 
months of 

McKinley 
law. 



$12,840,250 
11,323,047 
12,944,173 



,253, 

, 4.S9, 



Month. 



Internal- 
revenue re- 
ceipts first 
nineteen 
months of 
Wilson 
law. 



11.4^^0,956 

1^;. ]W»,387 
I2,i:i:i,5(il 
12. 048, U22 



331,232,122 



1894. 

September 

October 

November 

December 

1895. 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December 

1896. 

January 

February 

March 

Total 



16,183,149 
6,493,438 
7,774,074 
9,934,039 



480 
977 
880 
053 
385 
405 
104 
008. 
563 
084 
771 



11,041,401 
10, 800, 652 
11,536,364 



301,069,812 



Now comes a table of the total receipts of the Treasury Depart- 
ment for the first nineteen months under the Wilson law as com- 
pared with the fii'st nineteen months, and also the last nineteen 
months, under the McKinley law. I ask your special attention to 
this. It shows for the first nineteen months of the McKinley law 
a total of receipts of $566,919,004, and the total receipts under the 
same law for the last nineteen months, after the law had been 
assailed and discredited by the presence of a Democratic majority 
in the country, of $521,819,675, while under the operations of the 
Wilson bill for the first nineteen months the total was but $481,- 
423,509. The table showing the total receipts to which I have 
referred by months, and also a summary giving a comparison of 
the two laws and the net results of the same, I append here. 
2295 



Total TreasuTTti receipts first nineteen monthsof Wilson law compared with first 
nineteen months and last nineteen inonths of McKinlcy law. 





Receipts, 




Receipts, 




Receipts, 


Month. 


McKinlev 
law first 19 


Month. 


McKinlev 
law last 19 


Month, 


Wilson 
law first 19 




months. 




mouths. 




m(mth8. 


1890. 




1893. 




1894, 




October 


$:?9,3;J3.17-1 


February. .. 


$29,698,142 


September . 


$22,621,228 


November .. 


28.t;>78.ti74 


March 


:U. 115, 809 


October 


19.i:i9,240 


December .. 


27,(i-lli,515 


A])ril 


28,415.;!(;7 


November . 


19,411,403 






May 


30. 928, 8.57 


December . . 


21,;fti6,136 


1891. 




June 


30, 717, 101 










July 


30. 905, 776 


1895. 




January 


36,8](),2S3 


Au!4:ust 


2:1, 890, 885 






February . . . 


29. 27:!. 17:5 


Sojitember . 


24, .582, 750 


January 


27,804,399 


March 


29, 427. 455 


()ct(}ber 


24,.55:i,594 


Feln-uary .. 


22,888,057 


April 


25. 4(;5, 2;!1 


November.. 


2:5, 979, 400 


March 


2.5,470,575 




27,t>--;i.84'.l 
31. 2,-9. ,205 


December . . 


22,312,027 


April 

1 Mav 


24,247,8:16 


June ^ 


25, 272. 078 


July 


34,1.5S.,244 


1 1894. 




June 


2.5.615,474 


August 


28. 77;!. 981 






July 


29,(m;9,697 


September.. 


27.5r.5.4.-)4 


January 


24,082,738 


August 


28, 952, 696 


October 


28,448,.5li2 


February... 


22,269,:i99 


September . 


27. .540, 678 


November.. 


2(3,804.887 


March 


24,842,797 


October .... 


27,901,748 


December .. 


27,646,515 


April 


22, 692, ;i64 


November . 


25, 986, .503 






May 


23, 006, 994 


December . . 


26,288,937 


1892. 




June 


26, 485, 125 










July 


34,809,;^:S9 


1896. 




January 


30, 38;?, 478 


August 


40,117,605 






February . . . 


30,598.944 






January 


29, 207, 670 


March 


29,8:;ii,()06 


Total... 


.521,819,675 


February .. 


26,059.228 


April- 


26,971,.-i24 






March 

Total... 


26,041,148 


Total.... 


566,919,004 


481,423,509 



SUMMARY. 
Comparative receipts of two larvs. 

McKinley law receipts first nineteen months $.566,919,004 

McKinley law last nineteen months' receipts .521,819,675 

Wilson law receipts first nineteen months 481,423,509 

Comparative net results of two laws'' operation. 

McKinley law first nineteen months, surplus $24,988,221 

"Wilson law first nineteen months, deficiency 76,15^,876 

These tables, Mr. Chairman, show simply this, that while we are 
here clanioring for higher appropriations, and nobody is more in 
favor of them than I am. we are met by a condition of the country 
that compels this economy of administration, or whatever term 
you may choose to apply to it, and it all comes from the domination 
in this country of a, party— the Democratic party— a party which 
undertook legislation for revenue only and condemned the prin- 
ciples of the Republican party, repudiating in toto the proposition 
that we had a right to legis.ate in favor of the protection of Ameri- 
can industries. It has come about in some way, in more ways 
than one, in fact, but the great way which rises above all the other 
ways is the fact that it inflicts upon the country a paralysis of 
business from which we have not yet recovered and from which 
we never can recover while the existing law presses down upon ua 
as it now does. 

People are coming here to-day asking the Republican majority 
of the Committee on Ways and Means to lift from a great industry 
of this country— the sugar industry— the incubus put upon us by 
2295 



8 

Democratic legislation, and when we point to them that in the 
other end of the Capitol there are two representatives of their own 
State alisolutely blocking the way of the very legislation they ask 
for, tlii^y turn in astonishment and say: " Why. we never under- 
stood it to Vje so." A very small matter is asked for in the matter 
of a change in the tariff law, but we are compelled to say to the 
representatives from Louisiana: "Go to the other end of the Cap- 
itol and tell your two Senators to step out of the way and permit 
the Dingley law to pass, and we will attach to it the amendment 
that will give you the relief you seek against the legislation of the 
German Empire;" and they stand aghast when they learn that 
the men claiming to represent the interests of the State of Louisiana 
to-day stand and obstruct the passage of tariff legislation of any 
kind at the other end of the Capitol. Silence alone on their part 
and the Dingley bill can come up and we can add this relief to 
the bill in conference. Will these Democrats do that much for their 
own local interests? 

Mr. TALBERT. If the gentleman will permit me, I would ask 
if he has made a calculation as to how much the income tax would 
have brought to the Treasury if that law had been sustained by 
the Supreme Court, and whether, in his judgment, it would not 
have met the deficiency of which he speaks? 

Mr. GROSVENOR. My dear sir. we might have gone out on 
the high seas as pirates and seized the ships of foreign nations 
and robbed them and put the proceeds into our Treasury. [Ap- 
plause and laughter.] One would have been piracy 

Mr. TALBERT. Was the income tax of im7 a robbery? 

Mr. GROSVENOR (continuing). One would have been piracy, 
and the other was a violation of the Constitution. 

Mr. TALBERT. Was the other income tax that was passed 
before a violation of the Constitution? 

Mr. GROSVENOR.. I turn you over to the Supreme Court of 
the United States. [Laughter.] 

Mr. TALBERT. I think I should be in very bad hands. I 
should rather stay in your hands, bad as you are, than to go to the 
Supreme Court. 

Mr. GROSVENOR. Is that the idea? The Democratic party 
have depleted the Treasury. They have left it bankrupt, and 
now their idea is, " What is the Constitution among friends?" 
when it comes to a matter of that sort. [Laughter.] 

2295 



